972 replies to this topic

[Bront]

I dropped a few times in the group queue last night. Didn't notice a huge difference, but I expect it might be something I notice over a week or two.

I voted No, and here's why:

1) Confusion over how it works. I had to reexplain how game mode selecting worked in team speak several times. Sometimes to the same people.

2) I'd like to be able to drop in the mode I want to if I don't want a particular type of drop.

3) I already had 1 player drop from a match by suiciding just because of what mode it was. I don't need that kind of drama in a video game.

Sadly, these override the positives

1) I enjoy all modes (Even Conquest in a Dire Wolf, won one of those matches last night). Even selecting all, it's skirmish most of the time.

2) If the matches are truely more evenly matched, that's a good thing.

[JD R]

PGI listen to the players they said. Do what the players say they said.

And now? PGI how could you listen to the players?

A vote is a vote if your on the loosing side take it and dont cry.

[Heketon]

Admittedly, three matches is a small sample, but I have yet to vote on a map mode.

I was placed in two Conquest maps and one Assault map. I absolutely detest conquest.

I was slightly tempted to bail out the second time it came up, but someone else disconnected first. I swallowed my pride, stayed, and got annihilated like a good little soldier.

[Dracol]

I voted Yes because in the group queue last night we saw the difference. Games were much closer.

Shame solo queue had to saddled with this change as well. If solo queue could remain a hard selection I feel that would be the best, but until then group queue really benefits from the change.

[jackal404]

Russ, what happened to the stated reason for the original poll - to reduce the stomps? I haven't seen much in the way of comments to indicate whether this game mode change did that.

[Bilaz]

Different playstyles required for conquest or anti-conquest. And in uncoordinated match (no voice coms) conquest doent work for me. Mind you i dont have slow mechs, recently i mostly play lights but still i dont understand how to play conquest. My ELO comes from assaults and skirmish games - them i understand, but in conquest i'm more likely do wrong things at wrong times. And i suppose it works other way around.

So in theory me being in conquest would improve elo matching, but it wont.

[Gattsus]

Gremlinn, on 07 October 2014 - 08:23 PM, said:

Also if you want to get down to brass tax...shouldn't the people who pay for the free players to play get more of a vote than the free players? One of the problems with free to play games is that everyone has the same weight of a vote and an unequal investment.

Hell no!
If you want to pay to get more rights, go and play a lobbying game... and I have spent on the Overlord package and both clans.

[hero2zero]

I like the surprise factor this change has brought! It will help light/medium pilots gain an advantage over heavies and assaults who can just camp in one position for ever, now they will have to actually move and use tactics rather than pointing and clicking. With the added bonus of shortening queue times and reducing elo differences, this for me is a positive feature and should definitely stay.

Edited by hero2zero, 08 October 2014 - 04:43 AM.

[Jun Watarase]

>Every match is either assault or skirmish
>every match plays the same, both teams camp behind cover for at least 5 mins of the match
>there is no incentive to move around the map so people just camp and snipe at each other
>10 mins into the game both teams are still camping
>whoever tries to get closer first loses since they get focused fired down by the whole enemy team

Very fun and exciting....

[GentlemanBryan]

Vote NO! As a player I (we) should be able to select which mode that I (we) want to play.

[Eric Generic]

All modes typically just become skirmish 90% of the time. Who cares about the mode if the match is better?

[Kilo 40]

Carthoo, on 08 October 2014 - 03:22 AM, said:

Since Im paying founder on prem acc, yours is deleted - if we want to sound childish.

I'm not the one who said my opinion should count more based on how much I've spent. but go on being obtuse about it.

[Kilo 40]

Jun Watarase, on 08 October 2014 - 04:28 AM, said:

>lets not get more players, lets just force people to play game modes they dont want and make people quit instead, thereby going back to square one

yes that's exactly what this is all about

*eye roll*

[Gyrok]

How the hell is yes winning?

[GentlemanBryan]

Savage Wolf that is the funniest post I have seen in a long time....thanks for making me laugh

[Gyrok]

Gunther Nhilathok, on 08 October 2014 - 04:45 AM, said:

All modes typically just become skirmish 90% of the time. Who cares about the mode if the match is better?

But they are consistently NOT better.

[Jun Watarase]

Just played a match where both teams camped behind cover for 7 mins. Almost fell asleep.

[HammerMaster]

Very interesting. Yet disconcerting. I never CHOOSE conquest. We all have a mode we detest. Damn, when there is that last prig ecm spider hiding on skirmish. You SURE AS HECK HATE SKIRMISH AT THAT TIME. On the other hand. It presents a randomness that rewards non specialization. Its a war is it not? Anything could happen. That is to say, minus: Hey! We are dropping Caustic. So make sure you are not running snow camo and bring enough sinks and missles. Though we don't currently have that option! I am for making ELO closer. Whatever that means. I feel for me anway, that I can't be the linchpin in my drop. If I don't play spectacularly, I get another loss. Whether I get 300, 800, or 1400 damage. Now THAT is disconcerting!

[Josef Nader]

Carthoo, on 08 October 2014 - 04:27 AM, said:

Conquest is not "better" mode. We hate it. No money for capping, most pug teams leave heavier mechs alone and loose coz it etc etc. You go be "better" mechwarrior (not sure why running the alpine peaks for 15 mins makes you better").

I pay for spending time in what *I* want. Not in what someone else likes. So stfu about crybabies, beeing one yourself, stop doing drugs and stop telling people how to "improve" themselves, when its absolute nonsence.

Also I hope you "prefer" games where one team looses x people on the start, so the game is decided before it starts. Perhaps beeing 8 vs 12 and loosing, makes you better mechwarrior...

Frankly, I only selected/unselected modes to see how many times I got dropped into something I had unselected. The answer was not many.

I leave all the modes checked all the time, because I figure being able to play everything while piloting anything is the best way to mastering this game and improving my skills as a fictional stompy robot pilot.

I have zero qualms piloting a Locust in Skirmish, or a Dire Wolf in Conquest. I can do it all. I also remember a time long before we were allowed to choose what we could and could not play. I also remember when there was only one game mode and that's what you got.

Frankly, I've noticed a big improvement in the quality of matches I've been playing. Lots of closer games and better fights. As someone who recognizes that the current gamemodes are "shoot all the robots," "shoot all the robots," and "shoot all the robots, but you better do it fast because there is a timer ticking down," I'm completely lost as to why people care and what the difference is.

Ever since the base cap timer on assault got, like, tripled, all strategy has been drained out of that mode. Same with conquest. The base cap timers are so long that even the most geriatric assault can trundle up to the base before it gets flipped. The choice is an illusion. They're all the same.

Vote for closer matches.

[Kibble]

While this change effect group and solo queue I understand where people are comming from so probably the best solution is for PGI to just remove it from solo queue. However if due to technical reasons this is not possible then go with the community vote or come up with the conclusion of, is the grief from the player base is worth all this?

Edited by Kibble, 08 October 2014 - 04:57 AM.